betsy

While it's well and good to hear your take about me....how about bravely facing the question presented? With the possibilities presented by ID - that is not incompatible with common ancestry - one would think that's it's only rational to consider it as an alternative to a deadwood. I sure want to know what reason lies behind your clinging embrace to evolution. So let's read your own answer. If the theory of Intelligent Design is not incompatible with evolution -therefore you're not really throwing out your favored theory just like that - why couldn't you accept it, considering it is not a dead-end theory?

Yeah, I think that's the video that was initially referred by Dre....and gave me the idea for the topic Video Debates. That's one of the glaring criticisms and contradictions about Dawkins. His excuse for refusing to bravely face Craig. He claims he doesn't want to debate creationists (?) and amateurs.......and yet here he is, against Wright. Whom he obviously underestimated. Considering how Wendy Wright managed to rattle him, I could only guess how it must be in his shoes just thinking about a one-on-one with Craig. He must be having nightmares about it!

Who neatly fits the profile of an idiot? I wouldn't go there, if I were you. By that "single" dissenting scientific fact - for there are really many - you must mean the latest article(s) quoted above: Science Overturns Evolution's Best Argument!http://www.icr.org/article/science-overturns-evolutions-best-argument/ or did you mean this? A Critique of Douglas Theobald’s “29 Evidences for Macroevolution”by Ashby Camphttp://www.trueorigi.../theobald1a.asp or this? Evolutionary Leftovers in DNA? Not So, Says New Study. http://www.icr.org/article/evolutionary-leftovers-dna-not-so-says/ or this? Douglas Theobald Tests Universal Common Ancestry by Refuting a Preposterous Null Hypothesis Casey Luskin November 29, 2010 11:00 AM http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/douglas_theobald_tests_univers041021.html Yes, ID happens to match my belief - or some of it. What I believe is not the point. You're missing the target again....or you fail to grasp the thrust of the argument. It is a straight, bold scientific claim, don't you think so? Like a stake that drives through the heart of evolution....a coup de grace. It's a hit, execution-style. An annihiliating seismic claim like this should generate a flurry of protests from the science community, followed by refutations, one after another. So far, it's ominously silent from the evolution front. Not even a peep. Not a single source of refutation had been produced to counter that claim. You seem to just look at what's directly printed in front of you at the moment. You can't seem to read beyond that, and cannot retain other related highly-significant information that's been given before. It's not only a single dissenting one. Numerous opinion. From various areas of science. Cosmology included. Why do you think scientists are so baffled by the FINE-TUNED universe? The ID theory actually prompted a famous atheist - Anthony Flew - to change his faith from atheist to deist! Attempt to desperately sweep all details, (whether small or big) that tend to come together in support of the theory of ID, under the rug is being close-minded. You prefer to stay inside that dark box - your "haven" away from anything that might suggest or even hint at the possibility of a god. That attitude only shows how your belief in evolution is based purely on faith, and only faith alone. Well, by the looks of it....there is no safety in that box. If you won't knock those walls down, someone will do it for you.

M.Dancer: http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/05/did-the-israelites-conquer-jericho-a-new-look-at-the-archaeological-evidence.aspx

Cite.

Most of the verses/passages relevant to the fact are also posted along with every individual fact. The latest recap lists of 33 facts (p. 55) also include which page you can find them, so scrolling back for referencing wouldn't be too difficult now that we've accumulated so many pages.

You keep giving that answer. It doesn't jell, therefore either you're still not reading....or you don't get it. Let's try again: Here is what a pro-Intelligent Design explained. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/douglas_theobald_tests_univers041021.html Did you see this part? Intelligent Design is not throwing out the possibility of evolution. Therefore, it is not totally opposed to that possibility of common ancestry. This is where it differs with Neo-Darwinism. ID grants the possibility of common ancestry, but it does not require it! It's not written in stone that it is the only answer! If the evidence shows it, then it is accepted....but if it's not, then they don't have to accept it! Pro-ID is not stuck in a tiny box. They're not forced to desperately try to fit anything into that box just so to show evidence for evolution. They're open-minded to seek out other options - hypotheses/theories! Another major thing to remember, Neo-Darwinism is stumped. It had reached its dead-end. Whereas the answer to origin seems to be pointed towards Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is proving to be valid. Let me re-phrase the question to make it clearer: If the theory of Intelligent Design is not incompatible with evolution -therefore you're not really throwing out your favored theory - why couldn't you accept it, considering it is not a dead-end theory?

Yeah, one post....and I found it funny! The way you swooped in there "warning" BC against reading and finding out for herself what it's all about. It's not as if she was adviced to read from the very beginning. Heck, it was only a matter of scrolling two pages back. You sounded more like trying to do some "damage control"...trying to put a lid on something. Yeah...you're like saying "shooo. Nothing to see here folks. Go away. Don't look. There's nothing here." And all this time, you can't keep away. No. It's more like you've been shut up by these! You've got nothing to refute them with! You ran out of ammo....

After all that's been said in this topic, and in the topics The Bible, Video Debates, and The Church of the Non-believers, I ask: Why do you dismiss Intelligent Design and yet fully embrace evolution?

A century AND STILL COUNTING. So-called evidence that were and are refuted. Nothing solid. Not a single one. NONE. On top of that, science itself had just recently made this finding. Science Overturns Evolution's Best Argument http://www.icr.org/article/science-overturns-evolutions-best-argument/ I'm still waiting for any articles/sources refuting that latest posted article. If the best argument that evolution offers is squashed like a bug, just like all the other so-called evidence(s) of the past....what there is left? Compare with Intelligent Design: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/douglas_theobald_tests_univers041021.html Evolution should've been looked at critically decades ago and thrown out......except that science didn't want to deal with the idea of a god. Neo-Darwinism is very close-minded. Boxed in. It survives simply because of secularism.

Good. I developed this style because I noticed all Neo-darwinists also seem to have a hard time seeing.

--------- http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18914&st=810 Speaking of circular....I see that you 're biting that tail again with that silly redundant assertion And I bet if I demand a proof.....you'll bring up that global deluge again! You seem to be catching what PROVEN NO-READ MAN has. Don't you read, too? Or still in denial? Still in the state of confusion? What I do know for sure is that your evolution is the one that's a fairy tale and a myth! A spaghetti myth at that! I was watching a spaghetti western not too long ago - and boy, they are awfully funny and eye-rolling. Like this. And science is giving the proof! http://www.icr.org/article/science-overturns-evolutions-best-argument/ Furthermore, those who'd set out to write books (and make lots of money, of course) bent on their attacks on God and faith, are both running scared! Dawkins and Grayling. Must be giving themselves up as proof of evolution. From monkeys to chicken! http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18495&st=240 Boy, all tables had truly turned...

Both had written books! And both declined to stand behind their works. That someone would want to critique their books is not unheard of so, why be so "coy" about it? The biggest question: Why don't they want to defend their books? There's only one glaring answer as to why. They cannot defend their books, and they both know it. The books are meant for their target market - atheists who crave for anything to bolster their non-god faith, those who refuse to question and mindlessly believe in Dawkins and company. These jabs from the press are hitting bullseye! That statement rings true. Sam Harris' been rubbing salt by saying Craig is the only Christian apologist who'd put the fear of God in his colleagues! http://www.bethinking.org/resources.php?ID=866 Another atheist Philosopher from Oxford wrote Dawkins, suggesting his cowardice! http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/group/unbelievable/forum/topics/full-text-of-dr-daniel-cames How ironic! And what must be a tremendous let-down - to say the least - to all atheists. Dawkins and Grayling both know Craig definitely read and recognized the weaknesses (and the faults) in their books. Why do you think Craig is so gungho in critiquing The God Delusion, with or without Dawkins? Those books are nothing more than - to quote the poster above - "childish moronic garbage." The books are indefensible. Both authors must know that, and therefore would rather leave their books at the mercy of Craig than nakedly face Craig and outright public humiliation. That's the only rational conclusion.

Yes, political science and other areas of social sciences equire empirical research methods. Here's a detailed explanation. http://www.ehow.com/list_5939043_empirical-social-science-research-methods.html

Eh? You still believe in a flat earth? Didn't you read the Bible? Didn't you see the round blue earth's photo from outer space? Are you one of those who still believe the landing on the moon was fake? Just because you don't acknowledge the obvious CLEAR, UNDISPUTED and IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE....etc.,

I'm assuming your photos makes fun of me? Perhaps God wills it that I be spared.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18495&st=165 A month later, Dawkins and Grayling still cower. We're still waiting. Meanwhile the gentle proddings for the two to bravely face Craig become not-so-gentle anymore. They're getting pitchforked to walk the plank! http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/coward-a-c-grayling-and-chicken-dawkins-flee-debate-with-william-lane-craig/ Only shows how irrational these two so-called "rational" delusional monkeys are!

And since the previous FACT talked about the narrative of David, it's only fitting that this FACT becomes #34. FACT: ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY IN TEL DAN PROVIDES A CONNECTION TO THE RULING DYNASTY OF KING DAVID Excerpt from: Top Ten Archaeological Discoveries of the Twentieth Century Relating to the Biblical World Keith N. Schoville Professor Emeritus of Hebrew and Semitic Studies University of Wisconsin-Madison -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://biblicalstudies.info/top10/schoville.htm

DOP I've been missing out on those photos you've been posting. For some reason - perhaps due to the antiquity of my computer - they don't show on my screen.

Just so to make it easier, let's have a recap. So far there are 33 posted facts - not 36, sorry - all scientifically proven. 33 and counting... 1 FACT: Nothing holds up Earth. It is affected by gravity. p.1 2 FACT: The earth is round. p.1 3 FACT: There is an incalculable number of stars. p.1 4 FACT: Mountains and trenches in the deep blue sea.p.1 5 FACT: Invisible atoms, the building blocks p. 1 6 FACT: Noah’s Ark and Ship Buildingp.1 7 FACT: “Many of the great scientists of the past who founded and developed the key disciplines of science were creationists!”p.2 8 FACT: A finished creation.p.2 9 FACT: The universe is deterioratingp.3 10 FACT: The Universe Must Have Had a Beginning p.3 11 FACT:: Existence of ocean currentsp.3 12 FACT: SCIENCE REMAINS BAFFLED!p.3 13 FACT: EXPANDING UNIVERSEp.4 14 FACT: Hydrological Cycle or Water Cyclep.4 15 FACT: PROPHECIES HAVE COME TRUE!p.6 16 FACT: EXPANDING UNIVERSE: SCIENCE GIVES AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION BY THE WORD "STRETCH!"p.7 17 FACT: Expression - "CURVATURE OF SPACE," still related to STRETCHING UNIVERSEP.10 18 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health WOUND, SKIN and DISCHARGE PRECAUTIONSP.11 19 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health WASTE DISPOSALP.11 20 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health DIAGNOSIS and ISOLATIONP.11 21 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health CORPSES and BURIAL PRECAUTIONSP.11 22 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health FOOD and DRINKING WATER SAFETYP.11 23 FACT: Sanitary Practices, Disease Prevention and Public Health PROMISCUITY, UNLAWFUL LIFESTYLES and DISEASEP.11 24 FACT: The human body is comprised of some 28 base and trace elements which are all found in the earth P.11 25 FACT: BLOOD – THE RIVER OF LIFE 26 FACT: RODINIA and PANTHALASSA, One land and one ocean! p. 12 27 FACT: Man is superior to all other living things. p.36 FACT: SCIENTISTS NAME and CLASSIFY CREATURES p. 37 28 FACT: MODERN-DAY DEADLY VIRUS COULD BE PREVENTED FROM SPREADING BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS IN THE BIBLE p. 39 29 FACT: NO ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY HAS CONTRADICTED A BIBLICAL REFERENCE! p.43 30 FACT: THE REGENERATING RIBS p.47 31 FACT: CIRCUMCISION IS BEST DONE ON THE 8th DAY! p. 47 32 FACT: ARCHEOLOGY UNEARTHED THE EBLA TABLETS p. 48 33 FACT: ARCHEOLOGICAL FIND AT KHIRBAT EN-NAHAS IN LINE WITH BIBLICAL NARRATIVE OF DAVID AND SOLOMON p. 50

You remind me of a Die Hard movie! A battered guy standing in the middle of an airport runway, frantically waving flags to steer landing planes away from an area!

Shellshocked Dre couldn't keep away.....and as you can see, she's still here!

Try reading from page 26. That should give you an accurate idea where we're at now.

Pssst. Remember the forensic tech analogy? Betsy: Of course not....yet. It's just the start. But eventually, most murders end up getting solved....the killers getting caught. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18914&st=525 I bet you still don't get it. Bye-bye.